Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bible Contradictions
03-27-2010, 01:01 AM
Post: #1
Bible Contradictions
Ok,
Let me first say that I am only here to gain understanding about things in the bible that seem odd. I am not here to discount the bible at all.

There are several contradictions in the bible and I want to hear other opinions about what I am reading.
Serious answers only.

1.
Genesis 6 talks about the nephilim and how they were on the earth in the days of the flood. When the flood came, it says that every living thing perished. (aside from Noah and his family and of course the animals.)

2.
Numbers 13 talks about seeing the Nephilim. (Descendants of Anak came from the Nephilim.)

How can this be?
Does anyone know?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 05:09 AM
Post: #2
RE: Bible Contradictions
So far as we know, the word "Nephilim" means "large and mighty men."

Thus there were large and mighty men at the time of the flood--and then thousands of years afterward, large and mighty men were also seen in Canaan. There is no necessary connection between these two groups of "large and mighty men."

Large and mighty men are also seen today--Shaquille O'Neal, for example.

As for the flood, probably most Christians today understand the seemingly universal descriptions to be hyperbole--a literary device--that indicates the severe nature of what was most likely a local flood (i.e., something on the order of the flooding that resulted in archaeological remains of cities being found at the bottom of the Black Sea).

http://www.biblicaltraining.org/ --- http://www.ntwrightpage.com/
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 08:35 AM
Post: #3
RE: Bible Contradictions
So, you're saying that Shaquille O'Neal is a demon? Because they are depicted as Fallen Angels in some sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 09:58 AM (This post was last modified: 03-27-2010 09:59 AM by Paradise.)
Post: #4
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 08:35 AM)savaara Wrote:  So, you're saying that Shaquille O'Neal is a demon? Because they are depicted as Fallen Angels in some sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim

The demon thing is just one analogy:

There are four common views regarding the identity of the Nephilim.

1. They were the hybrid offspring of fallen angels and human women.

2. They were the offspring of descendants of Seth with those of Cain.

3. Webster's 1913 Dictionary defines the word simply as "Giant." Thus, any especially tall, powerful, large, or mighty man would be described in ancient times as Nephilim. Nephilim may simply mean "giant," champion, or strong man.

4. They are not historical figures and are ancient imagery with questionable meaning.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 10:09 AM
Post: #5
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 08:35 AM)savaara Wrote:  So, you're saying that Shaquille O'Neal is a demon?...

If you are of the opinion that all "large and mighty" men are demons, then your logic would make sense given your presupposition (which I do not share).

http://www.biblicaltraining.org/ --- http://www.ntwrightpage.com/
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 10:29 AM
Post: #6
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 05:09 AM)Stereophonic Wrote:  So far as we know, the word "Nephilim" means "large and mighty men."

Thus there were large and mighty men at the time of the flood--and then thousands of years afterward, large and mighty men were also seen in Canaan. There is no necessary connection between these two groups of "large and mighty men."

Large and mighty men are also seen today--Shaquille O'Neal, for example.

As for the flood, probably most Christians today understand the seemingly universal descriptions to be hyperbole--a literary device--that indicates the severe nature of what was most likely a local flood (i.e., something on the order of the flooding that resulted in archaeological remains of cities being found at the bottom of the Black Sea).

I agree with the theory of a more local flood. As for the Nephilim, during research it becomes clear that they are partly at fault for the flood. Also, the word Nephilim is only used in Genesis when it said there was no living thing (aside from ark passengers) and again in Numbers.

So, I guess what I'm asking now is:
So it is safe to assume that the literal words of every living thing perished is not actually the case?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 11:05 AM (This post was last modified: 03-27-2010 11:08 AM by Stereophonic.)
Post: #7
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 10:29 AM)PandAmonium Wrote:  ...As for the Nephilim, during research it becomes clear that they are partly at fault for the flood...

Here is the reason the Bible gives for the flood:

"The LORD observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth, and he saw that everything they thought or imagined was consistently and totally evil."

It is not stated that the Nephilim were any more at fault than anyone else.


(03-27-2010 10:29 AM)PandAmonium Wrote:  ...safe to assume that the literal words of every living thing perished is not actually the case?

The flood narrative is a narrative. Hyperbole is allowable in the genre of narrative. We do the same thing all the time even today.

And did you notice that my "all the time" is itself hyperbole?

http://www.biblicaltraining.org/ --- http://www.ntwrightpage.com/
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 11:18 AM
Post: #8
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 11:05 AM)Stereophonic Wrote:  
(03-27-2010 10:29 AM)PandAmonium Wrote:  ...safe to assume that the literal words of every living thing perished is not actually the case?

The flood narrative is a narrative. Hyperbole is allowable in the genre of narrative. We do the same thing all the time even today.

And did you notice that my "all the time" is itself hyperbole?

I understand the concept of exaggeration.
I am not ignorant. I am only trying to study the bible.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2010, 12:33 PM
Post: #9
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 11:18 AM)PandAmonium Wrote:  ...I am only trying to study the bible.

Good for you.

One of the things you might want to keep in mind as you read is, "What is the writer trying to tell us in this story?"

Ancient writers did not ever imagine that they were giving just the bare details of objective history. They fashioned historical narratives for the purpose of making a certain point.

In the case of the Nephilim, the references to them are not themselves the main point of interest; the auther is probably using the term to alert the reader that something is amiss, there is danger or trouble ahead.

And the overall purpose of the Flood narrative is to answer certain questions the reader might have, such as, "Why does God put up with so much evil in the world?" Within this purpose, the Flood narrative shows that God is already one step ahead of us--God has already "been there and done that" with respect to using brute force to "nip wickedness in the bud," so to speak. After the flood, God determines never to do such a thing again--God himself changes his dealings with mankind as a result of the flood--and this is a good thing for us, since it didn't take humans very long after the flood to resume their wicked ways.

http://www.biblicaltraining.org/ --- http://www.ntwrightpage.com/
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-28-2010, 12:58 AM
Post: #10
RE: Bible Contradictions
(03-27-2010 12:33 PM)Stereophonic Wrote:  
(03-27-2010 11:18 AM)PandAmonium Wrote:  ...I am only trying to study the bible.

Good for you.

One of the things you might want to keep in mind as you read is, "What is the writer trying to tell us in this story?"

Ancient writers did not ever imagine that they were giving just the bare details of objective history. They fashioned historical narratives for the purpose of making a certain point.

In the case of the Nephilim, the references to them are not themselves the main point of interest; the auther is probably using the term to alert the reader that something is amiss, there is danger or trouble ahead.

And the overall purpose of the Flood narrative is to answer certain questions the reader might have, such as, "Why does God put up with so much evil in the world?" Within this purpose, the Flood narrative shows that God is already one step ahead of us--God has already "been there and done that" with respect to using brute force to "nip wickedness in the bud," so to speak. After the flood, God determines never to do such a thing again--God himself changes his dealings with mankind as a result of the flood--and this is a good thing for us, since it didn't take humans very long after the flood to resume their wicked ways.

I thought God wrote the Bible? If men wrote the Bible then why would you believe any of it?

We would be 1,500 years ahead if it hadn't been for the church dragging science back by its coattails and burning our best minds at the stake
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Great list of MANY errors/contradictions, take a look. SomewhereInND 259 12,434 05-18-2017 12:10 PM
Last Post: Caesar Saladin
  Don't the contradictions in the bible bother Christians? GodlessGirl 133 8,465 03-16-2013 07:24 AM
Last Post: Edward



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)